o 
r- 

o 

CD 


L.  II..  No.  1  PRICI,  10  CENT* 


LAWLESSNESS 


An  Address  delivered  before  THE  Civic  FORUM 

in  Carnegie  Hall,  New  York  City 

December  12,  1908 


BY 

CHARLES    WILLIAM    ELIOT 

President  of  Harvard  University 
WITH    PORTRAIT 


NEW  YORK 

THE   Civic  FORUM 

1909 


CorvmcHT,  19.^ 
THE  Civic  FoRi'M 


Lawlessness* 

Two  months  ago  I  wrote  an  inscription  to  be  placed  on 
the  court  house  at  Duluth  as  follows:  "The  people's  laws 
define  usages,  ordain  rights  and  duties,  secure  public  safety, 
defend  liberty,  teach  reverence  and  obedience,  and  establish 
justice."  This  is  a  great  function  for  the  law;  and,  if  it 
be  correctly  described,  the  law  embodies  the  most  valuable 
parts  of  the  experience  of  any  people  in  its  onward  march 
towards  liberty  and  righteousness.  If  this  be  a  just  descrip- 
tion of  law,  what  a  mischief  and  calamity  it  must  be  for 
any  individual  man,  group  of  men,  or  community  to  be 
lawless !  The  law  does  not  attain  its  greatest  dignity  until 
it  records  the  progress,  embodies  the  sentiments,  and  ex- 
presses the  resolves  of  a  free  people ;  and  yet  it  is  freedom 
which  gives  the  opportunity  of  lawlessness. 

We  are  to  consider  how  American  freedom  has  made 
possible  lawlessness  in  many  forms. 

The  ordinary  violations  of  laws  intended  to  preserve  the 
public  peace  are  called  crimes,  and  the  individuals  or  small 
groups  of  persons  who  commit  them  may  properly  be  said 
to  be  lawless ;  for  they  commit  offences  against  the  public 
and  private  welfare  which  law  is  intended  to  protect.  Rob- 
beries on  the  highways,  hold-ups  in  city  street-cars,  in 
banks  and  shops,  and  in  trains  on  railroads,  burglaries  in 
houses,  banks,  railway  stations,  and  post  offices,  setting 
fires,  picking  pockets,  assaults,  and  murders,  are  such 
crimes,  which  illustrate  an  extreme  lawlessness  on  the  part 
of  individuals.  These  individuals  are  few  in  number  com- 


*This  address  was  delivered  at  the  first  meeting  of  THE  Civic  FORUM 
for  the  season  of  1908-1909.  Rev.  LYMAN  ABBOTT,  D.D.,  presided  and 
introduced  the  speaker. 

3 


0.93476 


pared  with  the  whole  population ;  but  their  lawless  acts  in 
total  involve  immense  injury  to  society.  The  material 
losses  are  very  great ;  but  worse  than  these  losses  are  the 
perpetual  apprehension  and  terror  which  these  crimes 
cause.  The  defenses  American  society  has  constructed 
against  this  sort  of  lawlessness,  though  costly  and  burden- 
some, are  utterly  inadequate.  The  police  force  is  insufti 
everywhere  in  this  country;  but  it  is  almost  helpless  in 
rural  districts.  The  high  explosives,  powerful  tools,  and 
fast  vehicles  which  applied  science  has  furnished  are  well 
utilized  by  criminals;  but  the  resources  of  science  are  not 
effectively  used  by  society  in  its  own  defense.  Burglars 
study  a  village  beforehand,  then  arrive  in  automobiles  at 
night,  cut  the  telephone  and  telegraph  wires,  fasten  up  the 
outer  doors  of  the  houses  near  the  bank,  blow  open  it- 
safe,  snatch  their  booty,  and  are  off  in  safety  before  any 
armed  citizens  can  rally  to  attack  them. 

The  defenses  of  society  against  criminals  have  been 
broken  down.  A  state  mounted  police,  with  a  thorough 
military  organization,  is  needed  in  every  part  of  our  coun- 
try— north,  south,  east,  and  west.  The  impunity  with 
which  crimes  of  violence  are  now  committed  is  a 
to  the  country,  and  demonstrates  the  urgent  need  of  much 
more  effective  protective  forces.  These  forces  should  be 
provided,  whatever  they  cost,  for  the  credit  of  free  insti 
tutions,  which  ought  to  prove  themselves  at  least  as  com- 
petent as  other  governmental  regimes  to  provide  the  people 
with  security  for  their  lives  and  property.  It  is  time  the 
American  communities  realized  that  a  government  which 
does  not  secure  to  its  people  order,  tranquility,  and  immu- 
nity from  criminal  violence  and  the  fear  of  such  vioK 
does  not  deserve  to  be  called  civilized.  A  vigorous  use  of 
proper  protective  forces  will  require  a  modification  of  the 
common  American  ideas  about  local  government. 


that  a  motor  car  can  run  through  half  a  dozen  towns  and 
cities  in  an  hour,  a  police  force  which  is  used  to  operating 
only  in  one  town  or  city  will  inevitably  be  ineffective. 

Again,  quick  action  of  the  courts  in  criminal  cases  is 
indispensable.  Our  protracted  criminal  trials  with  their 
many  volumes  of  typewritten  evidence  and  arguments,  their 
unreasonable  technicalities,  ingenious  metaphysical  de- 
fenses, and  possibilities  of  appeal  and  re-trial,  are  travesties 
of  justice,  and  in  practice  amount  to  a  grave  public  danger. 
They  account  for  a  large  part  of  the  increasing  distrust  of 
courts  in  the  popular  mind.  The  forms  of  lawlessness  thus 
far  considered  are,  however,  by  no  means  the  worst  forms. 

A  far  worse  form  of  lawlessness  is  the  violation  of  law 
by  commercial  corporations.  Many  of  these  violations  are 
not  explicit,  but  implicit,  that  is,  involved  or  implied  in  a 
course  of  conduct  which  seems  fair  on  the  outside.  Thus 
in  the  commercial  operation  called  promoting,  the  promoter 
organizes  a  corporation,  issues  a  large  amount  of  stocks 
and  bonds  which  represent  in  real  values  only  a  small  pro- 
portion of  their  nominal  value,  and  then  sells  to  a  confiding 
public  these  stocks  and  bonds  by  means  of  false  promises, 
and  exaggerated  estimates  of  profit.  When  a  satisfying 
amount  of  stocks  and  bonds  has  been  thus  disposed  of,  he 
steps  out  himself,  leaving  the  deluded  share-holders  to  put 
what  real  value  they  may  into  the  paper  capital.  No  crime, 
or  explicit  violation  of  law  may  have  been  committed;  but 
innumerable  lies  have  been  told,  and  many  credulous  people 
have  been  swindled  out  of  their  money.  The  operation 
taken  in  its  entirety  can  only  be  described  by  the  word 
''theft,"  although  it  may  be  quite  impossible  to  get  the 
courts  to  deal  with  the  thief  as  they  would  deal  with  a 
man  who  snatched  a  purse  in  the  street,  or  stole  coupon 
bonds  from  a  safe.  Nevertheless,  this  form  of  larceny  is 
more  vicious  and  much  more  injurious  to  society  than  the 


ordinary  form.  The  common  thief  is  an  outlaw,  and  his 
exploits  do  little  harm  by  way  of  example,  even  when  they 
succeed.  The  dishonest  promoter,  on  the  other  hand,  does 
not  necessarily  become  an  outlaw,  and  when  IK  It,  he 

is  apt  to  stimulate  others  to  attempt  like  iniquities,  so  that 
the  ruin  he  works  is  widespread. 

The  public  mind  is  often  confused  on  this  subject,  be- 
cause not  all  promoters  are  lawless.  Some  are  only 
guine  and  ill-advised.  They  actually  believe  their  own 
promises  and  predictions,  and  so  are  only  chargeable  with 
lack  of  good  jjudgment  or  reasonable  caution.  Other  pro- 
moters, who  capitalize  largely  properties  which  look  small 
to  most  people,  are  men  of  sound  judgment,  who  have 
acquired  at  a  low  rate  some  property  which  has  great  in- 
trinsic value  as  yet  undeveloped,  so  that  the  real  pro; 
behind  the  paper  capital  is  not  extravagantly  reprcsr 
in  paper.  These  promoters,  however,  never  abandon  the 
enterprise  whose  stocks  and  bonds  they  have  largely  un- 
loaded on  the  public  at  a  great  profit.  They  remain  in  the 
management  of  the  enterprise,  and  justify  by  their  skill  in 
developing  income  from  the  property,  their  original  valua- 
tion of  it  on  paper.  Such  promoters  increase  greatly  the 
wealth  of  the  country,  as  well  as  their  own  wealth.  They 
are  men  who  have  the  good  judgment,  or  the  good  fortune, 
first  to  seize  on  undeveloped  natural  resources,  and  then  to 
develop  them  patiently  and  wisely.  In  some  respects,  how- 
ever their  early  operations  look  like  the  operations  of  dis- 
honest promoters,  and  this  resemblance  confuses  the  public 
mind  as  to  promoters  in  general.  It  is  a  real  misfortune 
for  society  that  the  dishonest  promoter  so  often  escapes  the 
clutches  of  the  law ;  because  his  kind  of  swindling  can  be. 
and  often  is,  conducted  without  express  and  demonstrable 
violations  of  law.  On  this  very  account  he  is  a  peculiarly 
pernicious  kind  of  lawless  person. 


Any  man.  or  any  corporation,  who  conducts  his  business 
on  the  edge  of  the  law,  so  to  speak,  is  morally  a  lawless 
person,  though  he  never  gets  over  the  edge;  and  any  per- 
son, firm,  or  corporation,  which  conducts  business  in  this 
way  sets  a  very  evil  example  in  the  community.  An 
habitual  law-evader  is  almost  as  bad  as  an  habitual  law- 
breaker. There  are  some  unmistakable  signs  that  a  busi- 
ness is  being  conducted  illegitimately,  or  on  the  edge  of  the 
law.  When,  for  instance,  a  corporation  seeks  quietly,  and 
in  an  obscure,  unnoticeable  act.  new  legislation  intended  to 
legitimatize  corporate  acts  previously  illegal,  it  is  safe  to 
infer  that  the  corporation  has  been  conducting  its  business 
in  questionable  ways,  and  is  taking  securities  for  the  future 
conduct  of  its  business  in  questionable  ways.  When  a  set 
of  men  who  would  naturally  procure  an  act  of  incorpora- 
tion in  one  state  proceed  to  another,  and  there  procure  an 
act  of  incorporation,  the  assumption  is  a  natural  one  that 
they  mean  lo  do  in  their  business  things  which  would  be 
illegal  in  their  own  state.  In  the  interest  of  the  com- 
munity some  states  impose  restrictions  on  the  conduct  of 
corporation  business  which  other  states  carefully  avoid 
imposing.  Thus  one  may  do  things  under  an  act  of  incor- 
poration obtained  in  Maine  or  New  Jersey  which  one  could 
not  do  under  a  Massachusetts  or  New  York  act;  and  yet 
the  restrictions  imposed  in  Massachusetts  and  New  York 
are  presumably  for  the  good  of  those  communities,  and  of 
any  communities.  They  have  been  imposed  by  the  legisla- 
tures for  good  and  sufficient  reasons.  The  presumption 
therefore  is  that  the  man,  or  the  firm,  or  the  corporation, 
that  wishes  to  avoid  these  restrictions,  is  moved  by  the 
hope  of  selfish  advantage  to  the  injury  of  his  neighbors,  or 
of  society  at  large.  To  call  such  a  man,  or  firm,  lawless 
would  be  going  too  far;  but  it  is  certain  that  men  who 
thus  act  are  not  living  up  to  the  best  standards  of  their 


calling  or  occupation,  and  are  not  taking  due  account  of 
the  public  welfare. 

Low  standards  of  business  conduct  are  often  justified  by 
the  statement  that  business  cannot  be  conducted  in  con- 
formity with  lofty  ethical  standards,  that  the  business  man 
must  take  his  choice  between  destroying  hi>  business,  or 
taking  advantage  of  the  lowest  standards   which   the  law 
allows.    If  the  law  in  one  state  has  foolishly  set  the  ethical 
standard  too  high,  the  practical  man  will  move  his  bu>. 
into  another  state  where  the  standard  is  lower.     A  pa  in.  we 
cannot  say  of  such  conduct  that  it  is  lawless ;  but  we 
say  that  it  is  degrading  to  the  man  who  perpetrat< 
and  to  the  community  which  witnesses  his  career,  particu- 
larly if  that  career  is  successful. 

It  is  a  safe  rule  to  suspect  lawlessness  in  all  1m- 
transactions  which  have  to  be  kept  secret  between  buyer 
and  seller,  or  between  agents  and  their  principal.     When, 
for   instance,   a   transportation   company  s   or 

other  illegal  advantages  to  one  shipper,  but  not  to  all  >im 
ilar  shippers,  the  act  nin^t   be  kept  secret,  beca 
illegal,   and    the   corporation    which    habitually   does    such 
things  is  justly  described   as   lawless      Any   individual  or 
company  that  accepts  such  favors  is  also  lawless,  and  the 
profits  which  result  from  such  secret  arrangement  are  law- 
less profits.     If  it  be  contended  that  there  are  businesses 
highly  advantageous   to  the  community   which  cannot  be 
carried  on  except   in   this   lawless   manner,   the   ans\\< 
that  those  businesses  had  better  not  be  carried  on  at  all. 
When  a  poor  creature  who  had  committed  a  contemptible 
act  said  to  a  hard-headed  philosopher  in  justification  of  it— 
"I  must  live/'  the  philosopher  replied — "I   do  not  see  the 
necessity."    That  is  true  of  all  hu<ine«es.  if  there  are  any. 
which  cannot  be  successfully  carried  on  except  in  lav 
ways. 


Much  lawlessness  in  this  country  has  been  justified  on 
the  ground  that  the  managers  of  large  businesses  must 
protect  the  interests  of  the  owners  by  procuring  favorable 
legislation,  and  preventing  the  enactment  of  unfavorable 
laws.  This  justification  is  usually  pleaded  by  directors  in 
corporations  for  unlawful  acts  of  their  own  toward  legisla- 
tors or  public  officials.  It  is  said,  for  instance,  that  direc- 
tors must  procure  some  wished-for  legislation  by  any  neces- 
sary amount  of  bribery  and  corruption,  because  the  interest 
of  the  share-holders  for  whom  the  directors  are  in  some 
sense  trustees  or  managing  agents  requires  the  enactment 
of  this  legislation ;  and  that  when  purchasable  members 
of  a  legislature  introduce  laws  adverse  to  the  interests  of 
a  given  corporation  or  group  of  corporations,  they  may 
properly  be  bought  off,  because,  again,  the  interests  of  the 
share-holders  require  protection.  In  either  case  the  pro- 
ceedings of  all  parties  to  the  corruption  are  supposed  to  be 
secret;  but  it  is  an  easily  penetrated  secrecy.  The  briber 
and  the  bribed  are  both  lawless ;  but  the  worst  of  the  two 
is  the  briber,  and  so  far  as  the  quality  of  the  lawlessness 
is  concerned  it  makes  no  difference  whether  bribery  is  used 
to  procure  favorable  legislation  or  to  ward  off  unfavorable. 
Such  conduct  not  only  is  liable  to  secure  the  enactment  of 
unjust  laws;  it  also  impairs  the  confidence  of  the  people  in 
legislation  in  general.  It  saps  the  public  faith  in  legisla- 
tures and  legislators. 

Another  form  of  the  same  lawlessness  is  the  hiring  of 
members  of  a  legislature  to  promote  some  particular  agri- 
cultural or  manufacturing  interest,  when  questions  of  inter- 
nal taxation  or  of  tariff  are  under  discussion  in  the  national 
legislature.  It  is  the  supposition  of  the  law  that  legislators 
under  such  circumstances  keep  themselves  disinterested  and 
impartial,  because  their  votes  are  to  settle  the  general 
policy  of  taxation  to  be  adopted,  and  the  special  enactments 


in  which  that  policy  is  expressed.  That  any  of  them  should 
become  hired  agents  to  promote  the  interests  of  any  par- 
ticular industry  or  manufacture  is  utterly  repugnant  to  the 
law  and  to  every  principle  of  equity;  and  yet,  whenever 
Congress  engages  in  a  discussion  of  the  tariff,  such  trans- 
actions are  apt  to  occur,  and  sooner  or  later  to  be  revealed 
although  they  are  secret  at  the  critical  time.  Through  such 
lawless  operations  grave  injury  has  often  been  done  to  the 
national  legislation,  and  subsequently  to  the  moral  standards 
of  the  people,  and  to  their  faith  in  the  honor  alike  of  the 
legislators  and  of  the  leaders  in  great  industries. 

A  peculiarly  deliberate  form  of  lawlessness  is  exhibited 
when  corporations  or  large  combinations  of  men  for  1 
ness  purposes,  foreseeing  that  they  shall  shortly  wish  to 
commit  illegal  acts,  procure  beforehand  protection  against 
prosecution  for  illegitimate  practices  by  means  of  leu 
tion  apparently  innocent,  but  really  designed  to  intrench 
in  their  control  of  trust  institutions  speculative  and  im- 
moral officials,  or  to  prevent  convictions  for  criminal  vio- 
lence not  yet  perpetrated,  but  to  be  perpetrated.  A  familiar 
example  of  the  first  form  of  lawlessness  is  the  56th  Section 
of  the  New  York  Insurance  Law  which  made  it  impossible 
for  policy  holders  to  bring  suits  against  their  Company 
without  the  consent  of  the  Attorney-General.  This  Section 
defended  from  attack  by  policy  holders  a  small  number  of 
executive  officers  and  speculating  directors  who  wanted  to 
use  the  policy  holders'  money  for  their  own  advantage  in 
stock  and  bond  speculations. 

Another  interesting  form  of  lawlessness  is  defeating  the 
purpose  of  a  law  to  one's  own  advantage  without  actually 
violating  the  law, — for  example,  by  paying  for  a  patent, 
and  then  pigeon-holing  it,  so  that  neither  the  purer 
nor  anyone  else  can  use  the  patent.  Now  a  patent  is  an 
absolute  monopoly  granted  by  a  government  for  a  limited 

10 


period;  and  the  object  of  the  grant  is  to  promote  useful 
inventions,  and  the  consequent  progress  and  improvement 
of  industries.  When  a  patented  invention  is  not  used,  the 
national  industries  lose  all  advantage  from  it,  although  the 
inventor  may  have  profited  somewhat  by  the  sale  of  his 
invention.  The  purpose  of  the  law  to  stimulate  invention 
may  have  been  partially  answered,  though  not  in  the  manner 
intended ;  but  the  purpose  of  the  law  to  improve  an  industry 
has  been  completely  defeated.  So  obvious  is  this  defeat  of 
the  law-making  power  by  such  action  on  the  part  of  an 
individual  interested  to  keep  things  as  they  are,  and  so 
serious  may  be  the  consequences  of  this  mode  of  defeating 
the  patent  law,  that  the  English  Government  and  most 
European  governments  have  provided  that  a  patent  not  used 
within  a  reasonable  time  shall  cease  to  be  valid.  American 
law  provides  no  adequate  security  against  the  substantial 
defeat  of  the  main  purpose  of  the  legislature  in  granting 
patents.  Legislation  to  grant  perfect  monopolies  is  at  any 
rate  highly  exceptional,  so  that  both  patents  and  copyrights 
have  always  been  granted  for  strictly  limited  periods ;  and, 
considering  the  antipathy  of  freedom-loving  peoples  to 
monopoly  in  general,  it  is  remarkable  that  in  the  United 
States  it  should  still  be  possible  to  maintain  a  monopoly  of 
which  for  selfish  reasons  no  use  is  made.  To  hold  and  hide 
a  monopoly  right  for  selfish  reasons  is  to  defeat  the  in- 
tended beneficence  of  an  exceptional  law.  Whether  such 
conduct  is  better  or  worse  than  violating  a  law  is  an  ethical 
question  concerning  which  conscientious  men  might  differ. 
One  of  the  greatest  inventions  of  the  iQth  century  was 
the  invention  of  incorporation  with  limited  liability.  This 
invention  is  hardly  sixty  years  old;  but  it  has  had  a  pro- 
digious effect  on  modern  industries,  trade,  and  commerce. 
It  permits  the  massing  of  the  savings  of  a  large  number  of 
individuals  to  provide  the  capital  for  the  conduct  of  a  large 


ii 


business  which  can  be  carried  on  by  a  few  directors,  with  an 
appropriate  number  of  managers  and  foremen,  in  the  com- 
mon interest  of  the  share-holders.  The  foundation  of  the 
whole  structure  is  the  common  equal  interest  of  all  the 
share-holders.  If  profits  accrue  they  are  to  be  divided  at 
the  same  rate  among  the  share-holders;  if  losses  ensue  they 
are  to  be  borne  by  all  equally ;  and  in  the  choice  of  the 
directors  or  managers  each  share-holder  is  to  have  his  own 
proportional  equal  right.  In  spite  of  the  fundamental  jus- 
tice or  righteousness  of  this  arrangement,  and  its  enormous 
value  to  the  community  as  a  whole,  some  insidious  forms 
of  lawlessness  have  crept  into  the  management  of  corpora- 
tions. One  of  these  forms  of  corporation  la\\U 
the  selling  of  the  control  of  the  stock  by  a  group  of  d 
tors  without  the  knowledge  of  the  share-holders,  ami  with- 
out giving  the  minority  of  the  share-holders  the  opportunity 
to  share  in  the  profits  of  the  sale.  In  this  manner  the 
directors  or  managers  of  the  corporation  may  be  changed 
in  a  way  to  affect  greatly  the  value  of  the  stock,  and  yet 
the  minority  of  the  stock-holders  may  have  had  no  oppor- 
tunity whatever  to  protest  against  the  change,  or  to  take 
the  action  which  their  judgment  dictates  in  view  of  the 
coming  change.  Equitably  considered  this  is  a  violation  of 
the  fundamental  principles  on  which  the  law  of  incorpora- 
tion rests,  and  yet  in  such  a  transaction  the  law  may  not 
be  actually  violated  in  the  sense  that  the  violators  subject 
themselves  to  criminal  prosecution.  Nevertheless,  such  con- 
duct on  the  part  of  directors  or  managers  has  all  the  ill 
effects  of  violation  of  law  in  damaging  the  moral  sense  of 
the  community,  and  the  sense  of  honor  among  the  leaders 
of  the  business  world.  It  is  only  fair  to  say  that  in  respect 
to  such  transactions  there  has  been  great  improvement 
within  a  few  years  in  the  acknowledgment  of  the  honor- 
able obligations  of  directors  and  managers,  and  that  the 

12 


knowledge  of  the  duties  of  trustees,  as  understood  in  law, 
has  been  diffused  among  business  men  to  an  extent  before 
unknown.  Indeed,  one  may  say  that  five  years  ago  many 
leading  men  in  large  affairs  had  no  correct  view  of  the 
duties  of  a  trustee,  and  no  appreciation  of  the  fact  that 
directors  and  managers  in  corporations  were  in  a  proper 
sense  trustees  for  their  share-holders.  Many  a  firm  and 
many  a  board  of  directors  would  not  think  of  doing  to-day 
things  they  habitually  did  five  years  ago.  The  public  scan- 
dals and  disasters  in  the  business  world  during  the  past  few 
years  have  proved  in  a  high  degree  instructive  in  regard  to 
those  lines  of  business  conduct  which  the  law  and  the  senti- 
ment of  honor  alike  condemn. 

The  next  unlawful  process  to  which  I  propose  to  refer  is 
the  secret  defeating  of  competition,  when  competition  is 
asked  for,  and  is  indeed  necessary  to  the  legal  transaction 
of  the  business  in  hand.  The  owner  of  land,  on  which  a 
building  is  to  be  placed,  advertises  for  competitive  bids 
on  the  plans  prepared  by  his  architect ;  or  a  city,  for  which 
a  bridge  is  to  be  built,  advertises  for  bids  for  the  construc- 
tion of  the  bridge  on  the  designs  of  the  city  engineer.  In- 
stead of  making  independent  bids  on  the  work,  a  number 
of  building  firms  or  corporations  enter  into  what  the  law 
calls  a  conspiracy  to  defeat  the  legitimate  object  of  the 
owner  or  city.  They  agree  among  themselves  which  one 
of  them  shall  have  the  job,  and  therefore  which  one  shall 
put  in  the  lowest  bid,  the  rest  of  them  putting  in  higher 
bids,  and  they  further  agree  that  the  firm  or  corporation 
which  does  the  work  shall  pay  a  part  of  his  profit  to  each 
of  the  corporations  or  firms  which  put  in  the  higher  bids, 
or  shall  pay  a  lump  sum  at  the  start  to  each  of  the  cor- 
porations which  agree  not  to  get  the  job.  This  kind  of 
conspiracy  results,  in  the  first  place,  in  an  unreasonable 
price  for  the  work  to  be  done,  to  the  injury  of  the  owner 

13 


of  the  land,  or  of  the  city;  and  in  the  next  place  it  is  the 
defeat  of  a  perfectly  legitimate  competitive  method  of  doing 
business,  a  method  which  is  necessary  in  a  great  variety  of 
trades  and  industries,  and  which  is  commanded  by  law  in 
regard  to  the  transaction  of  much  public  business — national, 
state,  or  municipal.  It  is  noticeable  that  many  firms  and 
corporations  called  respectable  have  used  this  lawless 
method,  and  when  detected  in  it  have  defended  the  method. 
Convictions  in  court  have,  however,  given  public  demon- 
stration of  the  lawless  quality  of  this  sort  of  conspiracy, 
and  the  wholesome  publicity  given  to  transactions  of  this 
nature  has  satisfied  everybody  that  there  was  very  good 
reason  for  the  secrecy  with  which  they  were  always  con- 
ducted. 

Some  faint  justification  for  this  lawless  conduct  in  recent 
years  may  perhaps  be  found  in  the  very  general  outcry 
against  competition  which  has  pervaded  of  late  the  indus- 
trial, educational,  and  philanthropic  world.  All  sorts  of 
people,  indeed,  have  talked  about  competition  as  an  un- 
qualified evil,  which  was  everywhere  to  be  resisted  and 
condemned.  So  business  men,  who  ought  to  have  kr 
better,  may  have  thought  that  it  was  not  wholly  unright- 
eous to  defeat  the  attempt  to  award  contracts  on  competi- 
tive bids.  Now  the  fact  about  competition  is  that  it  i>  not 
only  the  life  of  trade,  but  the  great  means  of  improvement 
not  only  in  industries,  but  in  the  development  of  personal 
character.  Competition  is  the  great  revealer  to  a  man,  or 
to  a  nation,  of  his  own  power  and  capacity.  To  know  one's 
self  is  impossible  without  active  competition  with  other 
people.  A  nation  protected  from  competition  will  soon 
prove  itself  a  stagnant,  unprogressive  nation,  rich  ami 
strong  perhaps,  so  long  as  its  abundant  natural  resources 
are  not  fully  utilized ;  but  sure  to  decline  when  its  further 
progress  comes  to  depend  on  the  trained  skill  and  capacity 

14 


of  the  population  as  a  whole.  In  family,  school,  and  college, 
competition  and  emulation  are  the  great  animating  and 
stimulating  forces,  wholesome  and  effective  in  the  highest 
degree.  It  is  just  so  in  the  great  industries.  To  defeat 
competition,  therefore,  is  to  inflict  a  serious  injury  on  so- 
ciety at  large. 

We  have  thus  far  been  considering  chiefly  corporation 
lawlessness,  which  is  ordinarily  lawlessness  on  the  part  of 
single  men,  or  small  groups  of  men,  who  are  managing 
corporation  business.  We  come  now  to  another  sort  of 
lawlessness — the  violence  of  large  combinations  of  men  in 
prosecution  of  their  pecuniary  interests,  or  in  resistance  to 
wrongs  they  suffer  actually  or  in  prospect.  Under  this 
head  come  the  lawless  acts  of  trade-unions  in  pursuit  of 
higher  wages,  shorter  hours,  or  better  conditions  of  work. 
The  violence  which  ordinarily  accompanies  a  great  strike  in 
a  trade  which  employs  many  thousands  of  workmen  is  of 
the  plainest  and  most  elementary  character.  It  consists  of 
assaults  with  intent  to  kill  or  disable,  either  for  the  moment 
or  permanently,  of  the  destruction  of  property  by  explosives 
or  by  fire,  of  intimidating  marches  in  great  numbers  and 
often  at  night,  and  of  many  less  open,  but  equally  formida- 
ble efforts  to  frighten  into  acquiescence  non-union  men  and 
their  families.  No  one  doubts  that  all  these  actions  are 
utterly  lawless;  but  no  one  expects  that  the  unions  con- 
cerned will  take  any  measures  whatever  to  prevent  such 
violence,  or  to  punish  it  by  their  own  action  when  com- 
mitted by  their  members.  The  community  at  large  not 
infrequently  sympathizes  with  the  demands  which  the 
strikers  are  endeavoring  to  enforce.  It  seldom  sympathizes 
with  the  violence  used  to  enforce  the  demands.  Occasion- 
ally the  majority  of  the  people  seem  not  to  object  to  the 
destruction  of  property,  particularly  the  property  of  a  trans- 
portation company;  but  they  are  generally  offended  by 

15 


violence  directed  against  persons,  particularly  if  it  is  mur- 
derous violence,  or  reaches  women  and  children.  Sometimes 
the  unions  or  their  leaders  nominally  object  to  violence ; 
but  they  never  assist  the  public  authorities  in  their  efforts 
to  prevent  it.  For  this  policy  they  may  reasonably  claim 
certain  justifications.  In  the  original  resistance  of  the 
unions  to  unreasonably  long  hours,  very  low  wages,  and 
barbarous  conditions  in  the  places  of  work,  the  contention 
inevitably  became  that  of  warfare.  Violence  was  inevitable. 
It  was  a  downright  fight  which  the  unions  entered  into,  and 
success  was  only  to  be  won  by  sanguinary  and  destructive 
methods.  To  be  sure,  this  condition  of  things  long  - 
passed  away;  but  its  influence  survives.  Hours  an 
longer  unreasonable,  wages  are  fair,  or  high  in  most  indus- 
tries and  the  physical  conditions  under  which  wage-earner-; 
labor  have  been  in  most  industries  greatly  improved.  Col- 
lective bargaining  is  an  admitted  improvement  in  many 
industries,  and  the  right  to  strike  is  universally  recogn 
XevertheleNx.  lawless  violence  has  repeatedly  occurred  in 
the  American  cities  within  very  recent  years  in  support  of 
strikes,  and  much  of  it  has  been  committed  with  impunity. 
Often  in  recent  year-,  but  seldom  during  the  past  year,  it 
has  seemed  to  have  contributed  to  the  success  of  the 
strikers.  It  is  proper  to  point  out  that  under  the  new  cir- 
cumstances violence  to  procure  higher  wages  is  violence  on 
behalf  of  a  purely  pecuniary  claim.  It  is  not  to  be  com- 
pared with  violence  in  resistance  to  grave  oppression  and 
intolerable  conditions  of  labor.  It  i>  violence  to  get  more 
money,  and  is  on  that  account  a  peculiarly  offensive  form  of 
lawlessness. 

In  another  respect  the  unions  persist  in  methods  which 
were  originally  necessary,  bui  are  no  longer  even  defensible. 
Thus  they  insist  on  the  secrecy  of  all  their  preparations  for 
striking,  and  on  the  absolute  suddenness  of  the  strike,  so 

16 


that  the  employer  shall  have  no  warning.  These  are  sound 
methods  in  actual  warfare;  but  they  are  wholly  unneces- 
sary to-day,  and  they  are  very  destructive  to  the  industrial 
interests  of  society  as  a  whole.  Violence  secretly  prepared, 
and  breaking  out  suddenly,  is  a  peculiarly  objectionable 
sort  of  violence  in  civilized  society.  An  incidental  result  of 
this  policy  is  to  induce  manufacturers  who  employ  union 
labor  to  keep  in  their  service  spies  upon  the  proceedings  of 
the  unions,  a  practice  which  emphasizes  very  much  the  war- 
like relations  between  capital  and  labor.  Society  at  large 
justly  distrusts  all  secret  organizations,  and  movements 
planned  in  secret.  It  objects  alike  to  secrecy  in  the  trade 
unions,  and  in  the  boards  of  directors.  'It  particularly  dis- 
trusts and  dislikes  secrecy  in  any  part  of  the  operations  of  a 
corporation  which  deals  with  public  utilities.  It  not  unrea- 
sonably apprehends  that  action  which  must  be  kept  secret 
will  prove  to  be  lawless  action. 

This  inevitable  apprehension,  so  often  justified  by  experi- 
ence, has  suggested  the  real  remedy  for  the  violence  accom- 
panying industrial  disputes.  The  remedy  has  been  success- 
fully put  into  the  form  of  law  in  the  Canadian  Act  for  the 
Investigation  of  Industrial  Disputes,  an  Act  which  forbids 
strikes  or  lockouts  prior  to  an  impartial  investigation  of  the 
causes  of  the  dispute.  This  beneficent  act  has  now  been  in 
operation  for  twenty-one  months,  and  its  success  in  pre- 
venting and  settling  strikes  and  lockouts  without  violence 
and  without  any  arbitration,  either  voluntary  or  compulsory, 
has  been  remarkable.  The  Act  relies  solely  on  publicity 
obtained  through  a  tribunal,  the  appointment  of  which 
cither  party  to  a  dispute  may  procure. 

Lynching  is  another  form  of  violence  which  is  precisely 
described  by  the  word  "lawless."  It  argues  the  absence  of 
an  adequate  police  force,  a  lack  of  confidence  in  the  prompt 
administration  of  justice  by  courts,  a  liability  to  gregarious 


rage  in  the  ignorant  part  of  the  population,  and  often  the 
existence  of  an  intense  racial  antipathy.  The  barbarous 
cruelty  and  the  indifference  to  the  risk  of  killing  the  inno- 
cent, which  characterize  lynching,  demonstrate  that  it^ 
worst  effects  are  upon  the  lynchers,  except,  indeed,  in  some 
revolutionary  crisis,  when  all  the  bonds  of  society  are  loos- 
ened, and  laws  are  silent  amid  arms.  A  population  which 
frequently,  or  habitually,  resorts  to  lynching  as  the  punish- 
ment of  alleged  crime,  makes  public  confession  that  it  is  a 
barbarous  population,  or  that  its  barbarous  elements  are  not 
controlled  by  its  civilized  elements.  This  demonstrate 
complete  and  unanswerable.  The  causes  of  the  degradation 
being  moral  causes,  the  remedies  for  it  must  be  the  slow- 
working  influences  of  education,  steady  productive  labor, 
and  a  gradually  acquired  respect  for  laws,  courts,  and  the 
protective  forces  of  society. 

Another  illustration  of  the  readiness  with  which  a  portion 
of  our  people  may  take  to  lawless  violence  has  be 
by  the  night-riders  who  lately  harried  large  portions  of  the 
States  of  Kentucky  and  Tennessee.  This  seems  a  form  of 
violence  copied  from  the  Ku-Klux-Klan  which  terrorized 
the  negro  population  of  the  south  during  a  bad  part  of  the 
deplorable  "reconstruction"  period.  The  object  of  the  niqlu- 
riders  was  to  destroy  young  plantations  of  tobacco,  and 
prevent  the  sale  of  tobacco  below  a  price  fixed  by  an  exten- 
sive organization  of  tobacco  growers,  which  had  been  cre- 
ated to  prevent  the  Tobacco  Trust  from  buying  tobacco  at 
a  price  determined  by  the  Trust.  Resistance  to  an  oppre 
monopoly  was  at  the  bottom  of  the  movement ;  but  the 
movement  availed  itself  extensively  of  lawless  violence  in 
order  to  accomplish  its  objects.  It  was  a  case  of  strong 
combination  fighting  strong  combination,  but  by  unlaw- 
ful means.  It  relied  on  a  widespread  opinion  that  to 
kill  a  few  people,  whip  many,  burn  barns,  and  scrape 

18 


newly  planted  fields,  was  a  trifling  evil  compared  with  the 
selling  of  tobacco  to  the  Tobacco  Trust  at  a  price  below 
what  the  tobacco  growers  thought  "a  living  wage."  The 
night-riders  have  finally  won  remarkable  success.  Their 
tobacco  has  been  sold  at  a  price  higher  than  they  ever  de- 
manded during  the  long  period  of  their  lawless  operations  ,- 
and  on  this  account  the  harm  they  have  done  to  the  States 
in  which  these  outrages  took  place  is  all  the  deeper,  and 
will  be  the  harder  to  cure.  They  have  exhibited  lawlessness 
unpunished,  and  triumphant.  They  have  taught  all  the 
young  people  in  the  counties  affected  that  might  makes 
right,  that  personal  liberty  is  insecure,  that  law  and  order 
may  be  defeated  with  impunity  by  a  disguised  mob  operat- 
ing in  the  darkness,  and  that  in  the  pursuit  of  money  many 
men  combined  may  absolutely  disregard  and  trample  under 
foot  those  rights  of  the  individual  to  life,  liberty,  and  the 
pursuit  of  happiness  which  American  civilization  professes 
to  protect. 

The  worst  effect  of  night-riding,  like  the  worst  effect  of 
lynching,  is  the  barbarizing  of  the  men  who  do  the  violence. 
This  is  always  the  worst  effect  of  organized  and  extensive 
lawlessness,  particularly  when  the  lawless  work  is  planned 
in  secret,  and  executed  at  night  and  in  disguise.  In  such 
dark  work  there  is  something  peculiarly  appalling  to  the 
community  affected,  and  peculiarly  degrading  to  the  men 
who  take  active  part  in  it. 

Lawlessness  in  connection  with  political  office  and  gov- 
ernment administration  is  the  next  phase  of  this  great  evil 
which  we  ought  to  consider.  The  buying  of  public  office 
is  a  pernicious  form  of  this  lawlessness.  Senatorships,  col- 
lectorships,  and  even  judgeships  are  sometimes  paid  for  out- 
right, and  without  disguise,  either  at  the  stage  of  nomina- 
tion or  at  that  of  election,  by  contributions  to  party  funds 
or  by  money  payments  direct  to  persons  who  control  the 

19 


nominations  or  the  elections.  Cases  have  repeatedly 
occurred  in  our  country  in  which  the  notorious  purchase 
of  office  had  apparently  no  effect  on  the  political  or  social 
standing  of  the  purchaser,  or,  more  accurately,  in  which 
the  purchaser  was  never  sensible  of  any  ill  effect  on  his 
•career.  Yet  the  fundamental  principles  of  republican  gov- 
ernment could  hardly  be  more  grossly  offended,  or  more 
meanly  betrayed,  than  by  such  conduct.  Another  form  of 
lawlessness  is  the  use  of  public  salaries  to  advance  personal 
interests,  which  was  frequently  done  without  shame  under 
the  regime  of  patronage.  The  maxim  "to  the  victors  belong 
the  spoils"  is  a  war  maxim  and  a  war  practice.  In  Roman 
times,  in  Medieval  times,  and  even  in  times  so  recent  a^  the 
capture  of  the  Imperial  Palace  at  Pekin  by  the  Allied 
Armies,  the  spoils  of  war  meant  something  very  real  and 
often  very  valuable.  Political  spoils  have  also  been  \vry 
real  in  our  country,  until  civil  service  reform  made  head- 
way enough  to  limit  seriously  the  spoiler's  opportu 
The  whole  business  of  using  public  places  to  reward  politi- 
cal service  is  really  as  lawless  as  the  looting  which  a  vic- 
toriou»  army  perpetrates  in  time  of  war.  particularly  in 
\\ars  between  a  so-called  civilized  state  and  a  barbarous 
one. 

A  well-known  politician  who  had  had  experience  in  city, 
state,  and  national  administration  once  asked  me  if  I  1 
what  the  vice  of  politicians  was.  On  my  professing  an  un- 
certainty on  that  point,  he  said,  "Stealing,  just  plain  steal- 
ing." When  we  read  about  the  robbing  of  cities  by  their 
own  officials  through  rake-offs  on  contracts,  commissions 
on  purchases  and  payrolls,  padded  payrolls,  and  bribes  for 
votes  against  the  city's  interests,  we  sometimes  feel  ; 
this  experienced  politician's  verdict  were  absolutely  correct. 
When  we  read  of  officers  of  the  law.  whose  duty  it  is  to 
repress  and  punish  vice,  habitually  collecting  from  the 


20 


haunts  of  the  worst  vices  large  sums  of  money  paid  for 
protection,  we  feel  as  if  lawlessness  could  go  no  farther, 
as  if  we  had  really  reached  the  bottom  of  the  pit.  Surely 
there  is  no  worse  lawlessness  in  any  part  of  our  country 
than  that  developed  by  dishonest  governments  in  great 
cities. 

Again,  governmental  agencies  themselves  have  often 
fostered  lawlessness.  Thus  states  have  under-bid  other 
states  in  offering  easy  terms  of  incorporation,  in  order  to 
reap  money  from  the  fees  charged  for  acts  of  incorporation 
and  charters,  and  have  not  stayed  their  hands  because  they 
knew  that  easier  terms  of  incorporation  than  neighboring 
states  offered  meant  opportunities  for  dishonest  men  to 
defraud  the  community.  Executives  have  complained  of 
court  decisions,  and  have  reproached  judges  for  giving 
decisions  contrary  to  the  policies  of  the  executives.  Courts 
have  been  packed  by  executive  appointments  in  order  to 
procure  subsequently  from  those  same  courts  decisions  in 
conformity  with  the  wishes  or  opinions  of  the  executives. 
Courts  themselves  have  contradicted  each  other,  have  given 
decisions  on  technical  grounds  without  expressing  an 
opinion  on  the  merits  of  the  case,  have  divided  as  evenly  as 
possible  on  important  questions  and  have  brought  courts  into 
contempt  by  long  delays,  b?  reversals  of  judgment,  and 
by  multiplied  appeals  from  court  to  court.  Whenever 
through  any  of  these  causes  failures  of  justice  occur,  the 
courts  are  brought  into  contempt,  and  the  spirit  of  lawless- 
ness is  fostered. 

Society  at  large  must  bear  the  chief  responsibility  for 
lawlessness.  It  neglects  to  provide  the  protective  forces 
necessary  to  secure  order  and  peace.  It  permits  lawless 
persons  to  carry  on  with  impunity  their  operations  against 

21 


the  public  welfare.  It  fails  to  educate  the  children  in  rever- 
ence and  obedience,  and  to  inspire  them  with  the  love  of 
liberty  under  law.  It  declines  association  with  burglars  and 
forgers,  but  not  with  dishonest  promoters,  corrupt  offk 
and  lawyers  who  teach  their  clients  how  to  evade  1 
Under  free  institutions  the  law-breaker  and  the  law-evader 
cannot  allege  that  law  and  government  have  cruelly 
oppressed  him,  and  that  they  are  only  wreaking  a  just  ven- 
geance on  society  at  large.  The  victims  of  a  despotic 
government  may  sometimes  have  to  rebel  utterly  and 
ferociously  against  all  law ;  but  this  state  of  mind  is  impos- 
sible in  such  a  republic  as  ours. 

We  have  thus  surveyed  a  series  of  phases  of  one  great 
evil  which  has  long  manifested  itself,  and  still  manifests 
itself,  in  our  free  American  society,  among  the  educated 
and  the  ignorant,  the  rich  and  the  poor,  the  dwellers  in 
cities  and  the  dwellers  in  the  country  alike.  Some  forms  of 
the  evil  are  old  and  some  are  new.  Some  were  prevalent 
in  societies  much  older  than  ours,  some  seem  to  have  been 
invented  or  rediscovered  on  this  soil.  Is  then  American 
society  improving  or  deteriorating  in  respect  to  reverence 
for  law  and  obedience  to  it?  No  intelligent  American  who 
has  studied  his  fellow-countrymen  during  the  past  sixty 
years  can  hesitate  to  say,  in  reply  to  this  question,  that 
American  society  has  greatly  improved  in  this  respect,  not 
steadily,  but  by  spasmodic  advances,  and  has  made  specially 
large  gains  during  the  past  twenty  years.  The  means  of 
progress  have  also  been  made  plain.  They  are  education 
in  home,  school,  college,  and  church,  the  habit  of  regular 
industry,  the  amelioration  of  industrial  strife,  the  general 
disuse  of  alcoholic  drinks,  resistance  to  all  forms  of  political 
corruption,  the  establishment  of  pure  and  efficient  govern- 
ment in  city,  state,  and  nation,  and  the  steady  inculcation 

22 


of  the  ancient  precept  that  righteousness  alone  exalteth 
a  nation,  and  of  the  Christian  doctrine  that  material  pros- 
perity, and  public  happiness  alike  may  be  best  promoted  by 
the  universal  practice  of  goodwill. 


Questions  and  Answers 

At  the  close  of  the  address,  the  questions  from  the  audi- 
ence and  answers  by  the  speaker  were  as  follows: 

Question.  Why  should  it  be  considered  praiseworthy  and 
patriotic  for  the  Boston  Tea  Party  to  destroy  other  people's 
private  property — tea — while  in  our  own  present  day  the 
night-riders  are  equally  lawless  and  criminal,  and  when  they 
are  analogous  to  their  Boston  ancestors  in  destroying  their 
neighbors  private  property — tobacco? 

Answer.  I  was  brought  up  to  think  that  the  work  of  the 
Boston  Tea  Party  was  a  patriotic  one.  Doubtless  it  was  a 
completely  lawless  one;  but  it  was  a  lawlessness  that  pre- 
ceded war.  It  was  one  of  the  symptoms  that  war  was  com- 
ing, and  it  actually  did  precede  war.  Surely  there  is  an 
infinite  difference  between  the  object  of  the  Boston  Tea 
Party  and  the  object  of  the  night-riders.  In  the  first  place, 
the  Boston  Tea  Party  was  not  working  for  any  money 
profit  to  themselves.  (Applause.)  They  had  no  tea  to 
sell.  (Applause.)  The  night-riders  committed  their  acts 
of  violence  in  order  that  they  might  succeed  in  selling  their 
tobacco  at  a  higher  price  than  had  been  offered  them  by  the 
Tobacco  Trust.  I  think  we  all  see,  ladies  and  gentlemen, 
that  there  is  no  justice  in  this  comparison.  The  men  who 
threw  the  tea  into  the  harbor  at  Boston  would  have  been 
very  glad  to  have  drunk  some  of  that  tea  themselves.  They 
were,  I  say,  working  for  no  pecuniary  object  whatever. 
What  they  were  resisting  was  a  tax  on  tea.  They  had  a 
public  object — resistance  to  a  taxing  power  which  they 
deemed  to  be  wholly  alien  and  illegitimate.  That  was  a 
public  object.  The  night-riders  in  Kentucky  and  Tennessee 
used  cruel  violence,  in  order  that  they  might  get  from  the 
Tobacco  Trust,  or  somebody  else,  a  higher  price  for  the  to- 

23 


bacco  they  had  stored.     I  believe  1  have  an  hat  ques- 

tion. 

Question.     Would  woman  suffrage  tend  to  promote  obedi- 
ence to  laws  in  the  United  States? 


That  inquiry  does  not  seem  to  me  to  be  strictly 
relevant  to  the  discussion  of  lawlessness.  Nevertheless,  I 
will  say,  briefly,  that  I  do  not  discern  any  experiem 
any  part  of  the  world  which  sheds  any  light  upon  the  answer 
to  that  question.  One  would  have  supposed  that  the  addi- 
tion of  multitudes  of  women  to  the  lists  of  voters  might 
have  some  pacifying  effect  upon  political  and  industrial 
struggles;  but  so  far  as  the  experience  of  the  world  goe-.  — 
I  confess  it  does  not  go  far  —  women  have  taken  a  very 
active  and  violent  part  in  most  industrial  strife.  One  hun- 
dred years  ago,  when  the  English  unions  were  beginning 
their  warfare,  the  women  were  fully  as  fierce  as  the 
and  we  know  how  often  that  is  the  case  to-day.  Ladies 
and  gentlemen,  are  the  Suffragettes  lawless?  (Appla 
They  broke  the  windows  <»f  the  Prime  Minister  in  Downing 
Street.  They  made  demonstrations  about  Westminster 
which  were  not,  to  be  sure,  very  effective.  1»ut  -till,  so  far  as 
they  went,  they  were  disorderly.  (Applause.) 

Question.  Do  you  approve  of  that  provision  of  the  Im- 
migration Law  which  compels  a  foreigner  to  answer  the 
question:  "Are  you  an  Anarchist"? 

Anstver.  That  question  has  some  relevancy,  because  part 
of  the  Anarchists  in  Europe  are  men  of  violence.  The  philo- 
sophical Anarchists  disclaim  all  destructive  and  violent  in- 
tention or  action  ;  but  there  is  another  part  of  the  Anarchist 
party  that  may  fairly  be  called  men  of  violence.  I  under- 
stand this  question  to  be  "Is  it  expedient  to  ask  every  man- 
who  looks  like  an  Anarchis-t,  when  he  arrives  in  this  coun- 
try, the  question,  'Are  you  an  Anarch  i  It  never  seems 

to  me  expedient,  either  in  college  or  in  the  larger  world,  to 
pass  a  futile  regulation,  which  cannot  have  any  real  effect. 
When  I  became  President  of  Harvard  College  forty  i 
ago  I  found  in  existence  what  the  students  called  "The 
College  Bible."  It  was  a  pamphlet  of  about  forty  octavo 
pages,  of  rather  fine  print,  containing  regulations  and  par- 

24 


"licularly  the  prohibitions  which  were  laid  upon  the  students. 
Before  long  that  collection  ceased  to  exist;  it  was  wholly 
useless ;  it  was  worse  than  useless,  because  most  of  those 
regulations  could  not  be  executed  by  any  means  at  the  dis- 
position of  the  executive.  Now  this  law,  concerning  which 
this  question  is  asked,  is  just  such  a  law,  which  cannot  be 
•executed  in  any  effective  manner.  Of  course,  criminal 
Anarchists,  men  of  violence,  really  dangerous  persons,  feel 
themselves  to  be  at  war  with  society;  and  they  are  going  to 
use  all  the  methods  of  war — deceit,  disguises,  concealments, 
surprises,  and  ambuscades.  Is  such  a  man  going  to  answer 
the  question  truly,  and  say,  "Yes,  I  am  an  Anarchist?"  Far 
from  it.  As  to  the  innocent  Anarchist,  the  philosophic 
Anarchist,  he  might  hesitate  to  answer  no;  but  he  is  consci- 
entious and  peaceable,  and  might  just  as  well  come  into  our 
•country  as  not.  I  therefore  feel  that  it  is  inexpedient  to  ask 
such  a  question  of  incoming  immigrants,  and  I  believe  the 
law  itself  which  commands  our  officers  to  ask  that  question, 
is  an  inexpedient  law. 

Question.  How  can  you  reduce  the  desire  of  the  public  to 
fceep  the  lawmakers  busy? 

shiwcr.  I  am  not  sure  that  the  public  does  desire  to 
keep  the  lawmakers  busy ;  but  for  the  reply  to  this  question 
I  shall  have  to  assume  the  existence  of  this  desire.  In  most 
of  our  States,  the  legislators  meet  once  in  two  years.  In 
Massachusetts  we  have  the  privilege  of  an  annual  meeting 
of  the  Legislature,  and  it  generally  sits  about  six  months. 
A  portion  of  the  public  is  always  desiring  new  laws,  and 
arc  not  wholly  without  justification,  for  the  reason  that  our 
industries,  our  social  life,  the  condition  and  habits  of  the 
people,  and  the  quality  of  the  population  as  regards  race  and 
religion  have  all  been  changing  with  prodigious  rapidity; 
•and.  therefore,  new  laws  in  considerable  number  are  really 
needed.  Every  two  years  the  activities  of  the  legislators 
may  be  well  directed ;  because  in  many  cases,  though  not  in 
-all.  they  are  really  trying  to  accommodate  the  laws  to  new 
-conditions.  I  will  take  but  a  single  example  of  new  condi- 
tions. Within  the  last  fifteen  years  our  mode  of  thought 
concerning  individual  rights  over  against  collective  rights, 
'lias  changed  greatly.  We  have  changed  some  of  our  tra- 

25 


ditional  views  about  the  rights  of  individual  ownership  in 
land,  for  example,  of  the  sanctity  of  the  individual's  house, 
farm,  or  grounds.  \\Y  have  had  to  reconsider  the  right  of 
an  individual  to  hi-  <>wn  habits,  his  txxlily  habits  even.  I 
know  that  in  Ma^-aclin-ett-  a  large  number  of  laws  had  to 
be  passed  in  order  to  give  collective  right  the  control  in 
many  instances  over  individual  right.  There 

•     for    the    multiplicity    of    n<  (  hir    de: 

crowded  communities  have  been  brought  together  \ 
denly.  and  numerous  new  evils  have  arisen  ;  and  new 
result    from   the  effort   of  society  to  counteract    i 
which    this    density   of   population   has   created.     To    meet 
new    evils   legislators   have   many   and   many   a   time   been 
obliged  to  disregard  old  and  highly  valued  individual  right-. 

instance.    \\  e  have  had   in    M;. 

•  leal  of  legislation  on  insect  pests,  and  we  have  had  a 
deal  hit i.»n   to   prevent   the   spread  of  tubercn' 

This  legislation  is  all  good  ;  but  in  regard  to  t: 
it  has  swept  away  many  highly  valued,  old  individual  rij 
You  cannot  kill  off  the  brown-tailed  moth  on  the  principle 
that  every  man  is  sovereign  in  his  own  estate.     Far  from  it. 

v    individual   owner  must   be   compelled   to   clean    his 
inds;    else    the    brown-tailed    moth    will    triumph 
man  and  his  communities.    Any  -ingle-minded  worm  is  too- 
much  for  man.      (Applause.)      \Ye  used  to  think  in  M 
chusett*  that  we  might  -pit  wherever  we  pleased;  but  that 
individual   right   is  lo>t   forever.     There  may  be  too  many 
la\\s  proposed  »r  even  enacted:  but  m;  that  in  : 

instances  new  laws  are  absolutely  required  for  the  pre-crva- 
tion  and  defense  of  society  against  new  '  for  the 

accommodation  of  social  action   to   new   condition- 
plan- 

Question.     Hoe-  it  not  seem  to  you  that  juvenile  law' 

is  markedly  on  the  in  America,  and  if  so.  what 

remedies  do  you  propose? 

Ans'^i'i'.  1  ought  to  confess  at  once  that  I  have  had  little 
personal  observation  of  this  supposed  increase  of  juvenile 
depravity.  The  young  men  with  whom  I  come  in  contact 

are   somewhat   older    than   the   juvenile  cl;.  liich   thi«. 

:.>n  refers;  but  I  really  do  not  believe  that  tin 

26 


real  difference  of  tendency  between  the  'students  that  I  see 
and  the  younger  boys  who  are  going  to  primary  and  second- 
ary schools,  except  that  those  boys  who  go  on  to  the  higher 
education  are  in  some  sense  picked,  or  select  youth.  Juven- 
ile depravity  is  supposed  by  some  persons  to  be  the  natural 
outbreak  in  freedom  of  a  nature  depraved  by  long  inherit- 
ance. On  the  other  hand,  I  suppose  it  to  be  the  conse- 
quence, the  natural  and  inevitable  consequence,  of  the  bad 
conditions  under  which  some  boys  grow  up.  It  is  society's 
fault,  not  the  boys'  fault  that  they  grow  up  under  such  con- 
ditions. I  suppose  none  of  us  realize  how  utterly  inade- 
quate the  means  of  education  for  boys  and  girls  are.  I 
printed,  a  few  years  ago,  three  lectures  which  I  gave  one 
autumn  at  Teachers'  Institutes,  and  entitled  the  little  book 
"More  Money  for  the  Public  Schools."  It  had  a  very, 
very  small  circulation.  Nobody  was  interested  in  spending 
more  money  on  public  schools.  But  yet  the  expenditure  on 
schools  in  our  country  is  deplorably  small,  even  in  those 
communities  that  spend  most,  like  California,  for  example. 
In  New  York  City,  the  average  expenditure  is  high  rela- 
tively to  the  expenditure  of  the  country  at  large,  but  no- 
where does  the  expenditure  for  schooling  equal  that  which 
must  be  made  in  lodging  and  feeding  a  child.  That  is  not 
as  it  should  be.  Moreover,  we  have  been  extraordinarily 
ignorant  and  thoughtless  in  regard  to  the  means  of  stopping 
a  criminal  career  in  boys.  Judge  Lindsay  of  Denver  has 
opened  a  campaign  of  improvement;  but  that  makes  but 
slow  progress,  when  we  consider  how  many  millions  of  boys 
there  are  who  need  to  be  better  controlled  and  directed.  I 
do  not  know  whether  juvenile  depravity  is  on  the  increase 
or  not.  I  know  there  is  a  great  deal  too  much  of  it,  and 
that  that  is  the  place  where  the  community  ought  to  take 
hold  hard  to  prevent  and  uproot  evil.  (Applause.)  It 
is  very  little  use  to  deal  with  adults,  except  to  provide  them 
with  regular  work,  but  there  is  infinite  advantage  in  dealing 
with  the  young. 

Question.     Is  not  the  multiplication  of  laws  a  proof  of 
weakness  in  the  State?  x 

Answer.     The   multiplication   of  laws?     I    suppose  that 
means  the  producing  of  many  laws  instead  of  promoting  the 

27 


interests  of  society  by  a  few  laws  which  lay  down  threat 
principles.  If  we  refer  to  special  acts  relating  to  single 
individuals — for  instance,  to  the  Pension  acts  which  go 
through  Congress  by  thousands  each  pensioning  an  indi- 
vidual— if  we  refer  to  special  charters  for  institutions  or 
corporations  instead  of  to  general  laws  under  which  any 
institution  or  any  corporation  may  be  set  up  as  a  legal  per- 
son, then  the  multiplication  of  laws  may  perhaps  be  ex- 
tmne  in  our  day;  but  I  think  the  way  to  avoid  those 
has  been  made  known,  and  that  many  American  legislatures 
have  taken  steps  to  prevent  the  multiplication  of  special 
acts,  and  to  secure  acts  covering  round,  or  general 

uses,  in  the  place  of  multitudes  of  special  acts.     But,  as  I 
have  already  said  in  reply  to  another  question,  if  the  multi- 
it  ion  of  acts  or  laws  means  that  legislators  are  hoiv 
trying  to  provide  positive  means  of  righteous  action,  or  are 
endeavoring  to  cut  out  one  evil  after  another  by  the  roots, 
then  we  may  ea-ily  believe  that  the  multiplication  of  acts, 
which   we   see   going  on,   has   strong  advantages   for   the 
modern  State.     I.  of  course,  do  not  know  to  what  sort  of 
multiplication  of  acts  this  question  alludes:  but  I  think  the 
multiplication  of  acts  in  itself  does  not  prove  weakness  in  a 
State.     The  multiplication  of  certain  kinds  of  act- 
pedient :  but  the  multiplication  of  certain  other  kinds  of  acts 
is   highly  expedient  and  beneficial.     People  complain 
much  that  legislatures  sit  long  in  these  days;  but  the: 
often  very  good  reason  for  the  length  of  sessions     A  ! 
lature  needs  time  to  examine  the  multitude  of  bills  prop* 
and  by  a  long  session  is  enabled  to  make  thorough  examina- 
tion, and  to  throw  out  a  large  number  of  the  bills  proposed. 
It  is  also  able  to  improve  the  bills  which,  in  general,  it  thinks 
hopeful.     Moreover,   in    these   days,   there  is   a   reasonable 
readiness  to  repeal  acts  which  show  themselves  to  be  un- 
necessary or  hurtful :  some  time  must  be  allowed  for  that 
process,  which  is  often  a  very  helpful  one.     It  is  my  opinion, 
therefore,  that  this  question  cannot  be  given  an  explicit  and 
unqualified  answer :  but  I  am  inclined  to  deny  that  the  multi- 
plicity of  acts  is  in  itself  a  demonstration  of  weakness  in 
the  State. 


CIVIC   FORUM   ADDRESSES 

WITH   PORTRAITS 
VOLUME  I.     SEASON  OF  1907-1908 


1.  PUBLIC  OFFICE, 

The  Idea  of  Public  Office 

HON.  CHARLES  E.  HUGHES, 

Governor  of  the  State  of  New  York 
Public  Office  in  delation  to  Public  Opinion 

HON.  DAVID  J.  BREWER, 

Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 

2.  THE    STRUGGLE    BETWEEN    GRAFT    AND 

DEMOCRACY, 

HON.  WILLIAM  H.  LANGDON, 

District  Attorney  for  the  City  and  County  of  San  Francisco 
The  Vermin  in  the  Dark 

Poem  by  EDWIN  MARKHAM, 

Author  of  Ibt  Man  with  the  Hoe,  etc. 

3.  CONSTITUTIONAL  GOVERNMENT  FOR  RUSSIA, 

PROFESSOR  PAUL  MILYOUKOV, 

Member  of  the  Third  Duma  for  St.  Petersburg 

4.  THOU  SHALT  NOT  STEAL, 

HON.  WILLIAM  JENNINGS  BRYAN, 

Lincoln,  Nebraska 

5.  THE  ERA  OF  CONSCIENCE, 

HON.  JOSEPH  W.  FOLK, 

Ex-Governor  of  the  State  of  Missouri 

6.  PRACTICAL  COMMUNISM— WORK  AND  BREAD, 

DR.  FREDERIK  VAN  EEDEN, 

A  Working  Sociologist  and  the  foremost  Poet  and  Author  of 
Holland. 

7.  THE  GROWING  SOUTH, 

DR.  EDWIN  A.  ALDERMAN, 

President  of  the  University  of  Virginia 

8.  THE  PEOPLE,  THE  RAILROADS  AND  THE 

NATIONAL  AUTHORITY, 
HON.  PHILANDER  C.  KNOX, 

Senator  from  Pennsylvania,  and  former  Attorney-General  of  the 
United  States 

9.  DELAYS    AND    DEFECTS    IN    THE    ENFORCEMENT 

OF  LAW  IN  THIS  COUNTRY, 

PRESIDENT-ELECT  WILLIAM  H.  TAFT. 

10.  THE  AWAKENING  OF  CHINA, 

His  EXCELLENCY  Wu  TING  FANG. 

Minister  of  China  to  the  United  States 


Price,  10  cents  each,  postpaid 
Published  by  THE  Civic  FORUM,  23  West  44th  Street,  New  York 


7 he  SafifutrJi  of  Dtmotricy  art  Education  mud  Public  Diuuuio* 

THE  CIVIC  FORUM 

Non- Partisan,  Non-Sectarian 

A    NATIONAL  PLATFORM   FOR  THE    DISCUSSION    OF  PUBLIC    QUESTIONS  AND  THE 
PROMOTION   OF  INTERNATIONAL  GOOD-WILL 

VICE-PRESIDENTS 

Judee  David  J.    Brewer, 
United  States  Supreme  Court 

Hon.  Oscar  S.  Straus, 

Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 
Most  Rev.  John  Ireland, 

Archbishop  of  St.  Paul 
Rev.  Lyman  Abbott,  D.D., 

Editor  of  Tb€  Outlotk 
Hon.   Nahum  J.   Bachelder, 

Ex -Governor  of  New  Hamp 

MftSter  of  the  Nation*;  Farmrrt 
William  Dean  Howells, 

Author 
John  Graham  Brooks, 

Sociologist 


Hon.  William  H.  Taft, 

President-Elect  of  the  United  States 

Hon.   William  Jennings  Bryan, 
Lincoln.  Nebraska 

Rev.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  D.D., 
Chaplain  of  the  United  States  Senate 

Right  Rev.  David  H.  Greer,  D.D. 

Episcopal  Bishop  of  New  York 
President  Samuel  Gompers, 

American  Federation  of  Labor 

Ex-President  John  Mitchell, 
United  Mine  Workers  of  Am.      < 

Dr.  Albert  Shaw, 

Editor  of  Tht  Rfoiew  of  Rm'twt 


BOARD  OF  TRUSTEES 


Emerson  McMillin, 

Banker 

Morgan  J.  O'Brien, 

Formerly  Judge  of    the    New   York 
State  Supreme  Court 

Marcus  M.  Marks, 

President   National  Associations    of 
Clothing  Manufacturers 

Elgin  R.  L.    Gould, 

President  City  and  Suburban  Homes 
Company 


Isaac  N.  Seligman, 

J.  and  W.  Seligman  &  Co..  Banker* 

Henry  Clews, 
Banker 

Robert  J.  Collier. 

Editor  Collitr-t  Wctkfy 

Robert  Erskine  Ely 

James  R.   Reynolds, 

Special    CoMlsilBMr     for 

Roosevelt 


Elgin  R.  L.   Gould,    Trtastirer 
Robert  Erskine  Ely,  Exetutive  Director 


THE  Civic  FORUM   re  the  most  important  non-partisan  platform  in 
America  for  public  discussion. 

The  scope  and  influence  of  THE  FORUM  are  national  and  international. 
Its  purpose  is  purely  educational. 

Membership  in  THE   FORUM   is  open  to  all.     Full  particulars  will 
he  given  on  application. 

THE  Civic  FORUM,  23  West  44th  Street,  New  York 

'  !  BRYANT  £*»«-«  ADOIEM 

^^Sl****"**~** ]^^          CtroRVM.  NEW  YOIK 


-—  ssssr— 


RETURN    CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
TO—*    202  Main  Library 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

3rv 

3 

4 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 

Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling         642-3405 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

SENT  ON  ILL 

JAN  2  4  1*)7 

: 

FORM  NO.  DD6 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


